Table of Contents

This study is provided by ICPSR.
ICPSR provides leadership and training in data access, curation, and methods of analysis
for a diverse and expanding social science research community.

Comparative State Elections Project, 1968 (ICPSR 7508)

Principal Investigator(s):Kovenock, David M.; Prothro, James W.

Summary:

This data collection contains information gathered in a
study that explored political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors within
and among states and regions, and across the United States as a whole,
in 1968, just after the presidential, gubernatorial, and United States
senatorial elections. To facilitate comparisons within and among
states, separate surveys were conducted in 13 states, chosen to
represent the largest states and a variety of regions: Alabama,
California, Florida, Illinois, Louisia... (more info)

This data collection contains information gathered in a
study that explored political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors within
and among states and regions, and across the United States as a whole,
in 1968, just after the presidential, gubernatorial, and United States
senatorial elections. To facilitate comparisons within and among
states, separate surveys were conducted in 13 states, chosen to
represent the largest states and a variety of regions: Alabama,
California, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and
Texas. The other 35 contiguous states and the District of Columbia
were represented by an additional sample. Respondents were asked about
their national and state party identification, political ideology, and
perceptions of the ideological positions of the presidential
candidates and the Democratic and Republican parties. Perceptions of
existing problems, citizen duties, and political efficacy were also
explored, along with levels of confidence in the federal and state
governments. Respondents rated the potential "excellence as President"
of a dozen 1968 presidential contenders, and they rated the job
performance of the United States Congress, state legislatures,
President Lyndon Johnson, state governors, and the major political
parties. Respondents' positive and negative images of the 1968
gubernatorial and senatorial candidates, past voting behavior,
participation and party contact in the 1968 election campaign, and
1968 voting behavior (from president down the ballot, including
candidate choice in gubernatorial and senatorial primaries) were also
elicited. Demographic data include age, sex, race, level of education,
religion, church attendance, marital status, employment status,
occupation, and family income.

Access Notes

These data are available only to users at ICPSR member institutions. Because you are not
logged in, we cannot verify that you
will be able to download these data.

Dataset(s)

Study Description

Citation

Kovenock, David M., and James W. Prothro. Comparative State Elections Project, 1968. ICPSR07508-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research[distributor], 1977. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR07508.v1

Universe:
Adult population of the United States of voting age,
living in private households, who were at the time residents of the
state in which they were living.

Data Types:
survey data

Data Collection Notes:

The study was conducted by Louis Harris and
Associates, Inc.

The data were made available through the Social
Science Data Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina.

Methodology

Sample:
A total of 14 samples were drawn for this study. Separate
probability samples, stratified by size of place, race, and
intra-state region, were selected from each of the following 13
states: Alabama, California, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Texas. A supplementary sample,
stratified by race and (disproportionately) by region and size of
place, was drawn to represent all of the other 35 contiguous states
and the District of Columbia. With proper weighting, the data are
representative of each of the individually sampled states, of seven
national regions, and of the nation as a whole.